In a perfect (okay - fantasy) world —
Since the Government raises the precedent of Wickard v. Filburn, the court declares Wickard v. Filburn to have been decided in error, and that all laws and court decisions based on that precedent are hereby null and void...
Hey - a guy can dream, can’t he??
I hope that the Supreme Court uses this opportunity to repeal that odious piece of statist trash known as “Wickard v. Filburn” and restore some of the balance between the federal government and the states/people. The very idea that ANY action taken in the stream of commerce in ANY place has an effect elsewhere, and thus justifies federal involvement in the most minute of affairs, is insulting to the concept of federalism. In effect, “Wickard v. Filburn” repealed the 10th Amendment - which is an absurd result, but an indication of how far the statist in our society will go.
PLEASE, Justices, not only should you overturn Obamacare because the individual mandate is beyond the enumerated powers of the federal government, but you should overturn “Wickard v. Filburn” - THIS is your chance!
If this is upheld then we can throw out the Constitution, and any law or regulation that is deemed “social justice” can be enacted and there will be no “Galt’s Gulch” in which to flee.
“The power to regulate indirect effects is not a slippery slope. It is the disastrous loss of freedom that lies at the bottom of a slippery slope. “
Bears repeating.
Probably the stupidest and most dangerous decision the court has ever made. Do you realize, under this ruling the government has the power to bar you from raising a garden, doing home improvements, washing your car or changing your oil, or even cleaning your own house?!? After all, by doing those things yourself instead of hiring a contractor, mechanic or maid you are affecting interstate commerce (according to this ruling).
Dictator Baby-Doc Barack has ALWAYS ignored The US Constitution, ESPECIALLY with Obama”care.”
The cancer of Obama”care” now has invaded World Finances as Obama last week choose a “Public health expert” for the World Bank Presidency.
Romney has promised to “Repeal and REPLACE” Obama”care.”
Senator (R Tn) Son-of-a-Mitch McConnell has promised to “Repeal and REPLACE” Obama”care.”
_______
The major problem with THE NINE SUPREMES is that they are chosen for political reasons by the POTUS, and then they vote as an un-accountable democracy, for a Nation that is NOT a Democracy, but a REPUBLIC.
As a result, THE NINE SUPREMES commonly vote 5 to 4 on most issues. Constitutionality is seldom a consideration, and their up-coming ruling on Obama”care” will prove my point.
Now is the time to stand and deliver to address our grievances to the dictates of the Left.
Oppose the dictates of Dictator Baby-Doc Barack!
Our ONLY chance to ABOLISH Obama”care” rests with THE NINE SUPREMES, because Romney will be defeated by Obama.
IMHO, if Romney is anointed as the RNC Nominee, THE main issue in the National Election, Obama”care,” will be taken off the campaign table. Hence, Romney will not only lose, but suffer another crushing, and sadly typical, RINO defeat.
To those who want poster ideas, here are a few ideas for demonstration posters:
Obama”care” was robo-signed by Congress, and is therefore illegal.
Obama”care” was 2700 pages long, and is still being written, but not by Congress: witness the forced contraception coverage recently added by HHS Regulators.
Obama”care” has caused “The Catholic Spring.”
Obama”care” reduces competition, and therefore is illegal by the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law.
Obama”care” is designed to be a US Federal Government monopoly, with no competition.
Obama”care” also is illegal according to the US Constitution, because it violates our freedom of choice.
Will THE NINE SUPREMES notice any of these three violations? I seriously doubt it.
Impeached Bill Clinton proved that the US President is above US Federal Law, so anything that the President wants he gets, regardless of the Federal Laws that he has violated.
According to Thomas Sowell Obama’s lawyers will be using an obscure case from the 40’s to defend Obamacare.
It would seem that the 10th Amendment does give extensive powers to the state, or local governments, to regulate many forms of behavior and limit freedoms. Those powers that are not prohibited to the states and to the peole by the Constitution are fair game, to paraphrase the amendment.
Thus the states can mandate RomneyCare in Massachusetts and prohibitions on smoking in public places, to name a couple examples. But enactments at the local level are much more likely to be democratically reflective of the populace.
And maybe more importantly, when the laws imposed become too onerous, the population is free to move elsewhere. As we say they can vote with their feet, taking their tax revenue and livelihoods with them. That is why anything that can be done at the local level, should be done at the local level.
The SCOTUS case Raich took that absurdity even farther.
The case was a terminally ill old lady in CA who, legally under state regulation and doctor’s care, was growing six pot plants. The DEA executed a dynamic raid, smashed into her house, and confiscated the plants.
SCOTUS ruled the raid Constitutional, on the bizarre grounds that any in-state LEGAL activity which REDUCED demand in ILLEGAL interstate commerce was covered and actionable.
(One motivation may have been that had they ruled the sane way, the simultaneous Stewart case before them would have consequently made legal for felons to make their own machineguns from scratch.)